Ask me about swords.

[Androxine Vortex]

Here's a good article from John Clements: Swordfighting: Not What You Think It Is

He's an expert on historically accurate medieval martial fighting, as opposed to cinematic versions of the same.

In essence, it's hard to answer your question without knowing the level of technology in your world. The level of armor technology dictates the design of swords. The design of swords, and their employment against armored opponents, dictate the styles that must be used.

Thanks for that! It was a long article so I didn't have time to read it all but it was really helpful.

 

[Kittywithpen]

I'm experimenting with a blade design meant for powerful invested attacks and downward hacking motions, built to better penetrate armor. It is designed to exploit height advantage, both being used by cavalry and as a "Dwarf-killer" blade on foot (i.e. smaller, but heavily armored), and is meant to strike the helmet, neck, or break the hand behind the shield. Forges are High Middle Ages technology, assisted by some earth magic used to purify and compress the alloyed iron.

I'm thinking of something curved, weighted at one edge, with a "sweet spot" on the top third of the blade - but I'm asking you to help with specifics, and/or what i'm doing wrong. thanks

 

[wordwalker]

Penetrating serious armor with a cut is always doing it the hard way. Enhancing the thrust works much better, either to split chain or find the gaps in plate-- or a mace works better still on anything but full plate, and swinging it is less clumsy than trying to thrust from a horse.

 

[Iamfenian]

Anders I am being a bit lazy here...meaning I didn't read the whole thread. But you are perfect (hopefully) to answer this question. What were the swords made of during the Arthurian period (King Arthur). Thanks in advance!

 

[craenor]

I'm not Anders, and I'm in a hurry right now, so my answer won't be complete. However, I think you're looking for the Roman Gladius and the Roman Spathion.

Right around the 6th century time-frame they were changing primarily from the Gladius to the Spathion.

 

[Anders Ämting]

I'm experimenting with a blade design meant for powerful invested attacks and downward hacking motions, built to better penetrate armor. It is designed to exploit height advantage, both being used by cavalry and as a "Dwarf-killer" blade on foot (i.e. smaller, but heavily armored), and is meant to strike the helmet, neck, or break the hand behind the shield. Forges are High Middle Ages technology, assisted by some earth magic used to purify and compress the alloyed iron.

I'm thinking of something curved, weighted at one edge, with a "sweet spot" on the top third of the blade - but I'm asking you to help with specifics, and/or what i'm doing wrong. thanks

Well, the first question that comes to mind is: Why is it even a sword? I mean, it sounds to me like you are describing some kind of hammer.

Swords are, by their nature, usually not very good impact weapons, so designing a sword for that purpose is kinda unnatural. Not that it can't be done, but you have to ask yourself why they would do it if there are simpler alternatives.

Anders I am being a bit lazy here...meaning I didn't read the whole thread. But you are perfect (hopefully) to answer this question. What were the swords made of during the Arthurian period (King Arthur). Thanks in advance!

Well, most place the Arthur legend at the late 5th or early 6th century, so we're looking at early Anglo-Saxon iron age stuff. Swords of that time would be iron, the better ones being pattern-welded steel. Hilts could be made out of organic materials (wood, bone or horn) or be entirely metal, or combine organic and metal parts. Traits of the later Roman spathae would have started to turn into proper migration period swords.

Examples:

http://www.templ.net/pics-weapons/117-germanic_gold_hilt_spatha/a17av.jpg
http://www.templ.net/pics-weapons/149-sword/149_hilt-v.jpg
http://www.templ.net/pics-weapons/152-spatha/152-mec3009tifu-v.jpg

Mind, this is if you absolutely want to place King Arthur in a historically accurate context. The people who wrote down the medieval romances imagined it all as contemporary to their own time, of course, because they had no real concept of what life was like 500-800 years earlier.

 

[wordwalker]

Why enchant a sword?

I'm experimenting with a blade design meant for powerful invested attacks and downward hacking motions, built to better penetrate armor. It is designed to exploit height advantage, both being used by cavalry and as a "Dwarf-killer" blade on foot (i.e. smaller, but heavily armored), and is meant to strike the helmet, neck, or break the hand behind the shield. Forges are High Middle Ages technology, assisted by some earth magic used to purify and compress the alloyed iron.

Well, the first question that comes to mind is: Why is it even a sword? I mean, it sounds to me like you are describing some kind of hammer.

Swords are, by their nature, usually not very good impact weapons, so designing a sword for that purpose is kinda unnatural. Not that it can't be done, but you have to ask yourself why they would do it if there are simpler alternatives.

I've always thought of this as "lightsaber logic"-- if you're going to make a super-powerful melee weapon, you might as well make it a sword rather than trade some of the sword's speed for an axe or hammer's weight, when the magic means you won't need it.

(Plus, sure, one reason swords have always been a favorite with writers and real soldiers: it's just more impressive to wave a sword around because nobody can look at it and think "That's the symbol of war, honor-- and carpenters.")

And we do assume a weapon's enchantment is going to be for raw penetrating and damaging power; Excalibur has been translated as "cut-steel," Anduril chopped through an orc's helmet and skull, and so on. (Hmm, a Hammer of Perfect Wielding might do the same thing as a Sword of Sharpness...)

But like Anders said, choosing a sword isn't the simple way to build up that force-- for anything that isn't a top-level weapon that's got power to spare. And, it assumes nobody's able to improve their armor to match it, or otherwise be tougher than human. (Probably why Thor uses a hammer: to kill giants.) So you might have:

• enhanced swords, that give some leaders an extra edge against moderately-armored troops, less so against the heavy elite
• enhanced heavy weapons, for the enhanced-armored captains to batter at each other
• Swords of Power, for a hero to scythe through anything except top magic armor
• Master Maces, paired with the best armor for the heroes' showdown

 

[Iamfenian]

Not versed well at all in fae mythology I wonder what their swords are made of as I have read somewhere they have an aversion to iron.

 

[Ireth]

Not versed well at all in fae mythology I wonder what their swords are made of as I have read somewhere they have an aversion to iron.

Most stories I know of the Fae have them use bronze swords.

 

[craenor]

Most stories I know of the Fae have them use bronze swords.

Bronze is sometimes accounted as a common material for mundane Fae weaponry.

The less mundane swords, sometimes accounted mystical properties, have been often described as Swords of Light. That's not to say that they were lightsabres, but rather that they were crafted from often-unstated materials which gave them a bright silver or golden hue.

From a mythology standpoint, this material could be attributed to something like Moon Silver, True Silver, or the like. From a historical standpoint, this is probably a mystical quality granted to an extremely well-crafted blade. Keep in mind, the typical sword of the time this mythology was created was crafted from low carbon steel, loaded with slag, and polished only enough to allow a semi-sharpened edge. They were poor quality weapons.

However, even during that time, some few smiths had harnessed the secrets of making high carbon, tempered blades, that could be polished to a gleaming luster and had far superior cutting and toughness qualities compared to their contemporary peers.

To many, these swords might even appear magical. And magical, for that time period, was tantamount to saying - of the fae.

 

[nitoincog]

Fellow aspie here, my interests/obsessions are swords, history, martial arts, and magic/fantasy/myths ect. I'm interested to know what you think about damascus steel as a whole as well as what metal and carbon mixtures would make an ideal modern battle ready sword.

 

[Anders Ämting]

Not versed well at all in fae mythology I wonder what their swords are made of as I have read somewhere they have an aversion to iron.

It's a common theme in European folklore, actually. Around here it's the trolls and vittra who hate iron.

Since I'm not very versed in fairy folkore, though, I'll just leave you at the mercy of Ireth and Creanor for now.

Fellow aspie here, my interests/obsessions are swords, history, martial arts, and magic/fantasy/myths ect. I'm interested to know what you think about damascus steel as a whole

If you mean wootz, I never found it that interesting since I think it looks somewhat dull, no pun intended. Though, I think it's too bad we don't know how to make the stuff anymore, especially considering the whole carbon nanotube thing.

If you mean pattern welding (which is technically not true damascus, but is called that by enough people that it's a pretty legit way to use the word) I think it's a nice thing to have but these days it's mostly bling. Not that bling is a bad thing - many sword fans these days have taken a kind of strict utalitarian stance to it all, which I don't think was very common historically. Artifacts suggest that warriors of old liked their weapons to be as fancy as they could afford since they were status symbols as well as weapons. But I digress.

The really neat pattern welding is actually found in the modern knifemaking business. Those people do some crazy stuff - I'm a fan of explosion damascus and mosaic damascus, personally. Google them for some nice pictures. (But make sure to specific "explosion damascus blade" or you'll be in for some depressing results.)

Sadly, swords with pattern welding actually see a lot less variation and artistic expression than knifes. (But then knives is a bigger business.)

as well as what metal and carbon mixtures would make an ideal modern battle ready sword.

There are a lot of modern steels to choose from, depending on what you consider to be "ideal." Metalurgy is still very much a thriving science an occasionally people in the field will start buzzing about some new "super steel." At the end of the day, though, you still have to compare and weigh different factors to one another - durability, edge-keeping capacity, resistance to corrosion, price, how difficult it is to work with, and what qualities you actually need in a sword before heading into blatant overkill territory.

If we look at pure carbon steel, then 1045 (that is, steel with 0.45% carbon) is considered pretty ideal since it has a good balance of desirable traits and is relatively easy to work with. 1095 is harder, resulting in more brittle blades but also sharper edges. So, which one you go by depend on wether you prioritize sharp edges or durability.

If we move on to more advanced alloys, 5160 spring steel is very popular among sword producers. It is also used to make leaf springs for trucks and is very resilient when properly heat treated. 9260 is a similar steel with very good reputation, being possibly even stronger than 5160. Then there is the tool steels: T-10 tungsten alloy steel is used for higher end swords, often found in the more expensive production katanas. It is very hard in proportion to its strenght, resulting in a blade that can keep very sharp edges without sacrificing durability. L6 Bainite is another tool steel made popular by modern katana smith Howard Clark. Also used for bandsaw blades, it can be tricky to work with but is generally considered one of the most durable steel types you can get your hands on.

As you can see, there's a lot to choose from, and these are just the more commons steels available. The information may even be a bit outdated by now, because new steels are still being developed. Anyway, it's vital to keep in mind that it's not just the steel that matters - each alloy requires its own ideal heat treatment method to bring out the best qualities, and some heat treatment methods are trickier than others.

 

[craenor]

Anyone really interested in Wootz/Damascus blades, should track down the work of Kevin Cashen. He mostly makes shorter blades (knives), but he also makes swords, and they are pretty damned amazing.

 

[Ty Crawford]

Think I could get some info on two different swords?

Hey Anders, Ive got a quick question for you man. It involves two different versions of the sword.
The Flamberge, and the Buster Blade.

Ok, my first question is, What was the effectiveness of the flamberge. Ive tried to research this, and still nobody can give me decent information on the subject. So far, I'm thinking the many curves put on it add to aerodynamics in slicing or what-not, but I've never owned one, so I can't say so for sure.


My second question is the Buster Blade. If someone wanted one strong enough to defend attacks that a shield could, but still not loose its density, and what-not, what should it be made from? I dont know enough of these swords yet.

 

[Anders Ämting]

Hey Anders, Ive got a quick question for you man. It involves two different versions of the sword.
The Flamberge, and the Buster Blade.

Ok, my first question is, What was the effectiveness of the flamberge. Ive tried to research this, and still nobody can give me decent information on the subject. So far, I'm thinking the many curves put on it add to aerodynamics in slicing or what-not, but I've never owned one, so I can't say so for sure.

This has been discussed a lot, actually, and the bottom line is: Nobody really seems to know exactly what flame-bladed swords are actually good for. Some think it's just for decoration, others argue there are various benefits to it. I am personally not aware of any conclusing having been reached on either side. Though, most seem to agree that they at least aren't worse than regular swords.

My second question is the Buster Blade. If someone wanted one strong enough to defend attacks that a shield could, but still not loose its density, and what-not, what should it be made from? I dont know enough of these swords yet.

By "buster blade", you mean like a FF7-style buster sword?

I'm a bit confused by your question. If you want to shield yourself from attacks, high density would be a benefit. And at those dimensions, regular steel would do just fine for that purpose.

 

[craenor]

As Anders mentioned, the flammard (or flambard) was sometimes considered to have had various benefits. The earliest versions had rougher, sawtooth like curves and were thought to be useful at getting through pikes and such.

They were also (incorrectly) thought to deliver more grievous wounds.

And lastly, they were believed to slow the opponents sword when parrying and deliver a wicked feedback vibration to the opponent.

Regardless whether any of this is true, they still were historically popular weapons around the end of the 15th and during the 16th centuries.

 

[Ty Crawford]

RE: Buster Blade

Yes, I'm referring to Clouds FF7 Buster blade. Or the same used Buster blade as in Yugioh. Most of them usually have a hole near the front of the blade. Were such swords used back then?

I'm having a berserker in one of my books use one, but I cant describe the combat in the book without decent knowledge on how the sword works. I know its a fantasy blade, but hey, so is the book I'm writing :showoff:

 

[craenor]

Well, if the buster-style sword in your world has some magical properties that allow it to overcome its failing, then you can have it work any way you want. My advice would be to emphasize the "buster" aspects - the name comes, supposedly, from busting or breaking things up with sheer force.

However, if you want to describe the blade's functionality in real martial use, instead of relying upon some magical or fantasy properties, then I can't help you. This is a horrendous design, doomed to utter and complete failure as a weapon.

 

[wordwalker]

The Buster is partly inspired by the Zanbatō, the fabled "horse-chopping sword" that turns up in some Asian legends-- but was only actually made as an oversized temple offering you weren't even supposed to lift.

A sword like Cloud's (and I've seen them drawn a lot bigger; see InuYasha or early Ruroni Kenshin) is just too heavy to be worth trying to swing, and making it a sword (as opposed to an oversized axe or hammer) also means the metal's likely to be too thin and shatter itself. (Plus, in Japan itself, they'd never try making one to real sword standards because they didn't have the iron to waste!)

So yes, a Buster Sword would be a heavily magic weapon, probably spelled to hold itself together and to add force to someone starting to swing it (or just given to someone with superhuman strength; a berserker would love anything that big that wouldn't break on him). Very clumsy, but just the thing to smash a dragon or a wave of knights. But it would still be pure ego not to make it in the form of a hammer, when it's so awkward it can't have the control you'd want a sword for.

 

[Anders Ämting]

Yes, I'm referring to Clouds FF7 Buster blade. Or the same used Buster blade as in Yugioh. Most of them usually have a hole near the front of the blade. Were such swords used back then?

As far as I know, no swords had holes in the blade except a few rapiers that could have very small perforations for decorative purposes. Otherwise, it's not a good idea to put a hole in your sword because it weakens it structurally.

For something like Cloud's sword, that is of course not really an issue. It's mostly aestetic - something the designer put there to make it look more interesting.

I'm having a berserker in one of my books use one, but I cant describe the combat in the book without decent knowledge on how the sword works. I know its a fantasy blade, but hey, so is the book I'm writing :showoff:

Well, seeing as this is a fictional sword, your best bet is to simply look up other works of fiction where similar weapons are used - FF7: Advent Children, Beserk, the Soul Calibur games, etc.

Well, if the buster-style sword in your world has some magical properties that allow it to overcome its failing, then you can have it work any way you want. My advice would be to emphasize the "buster" aspects - the name comes, supposedly, from busting or breaking things up with sheer force.

However, if you want to describe the blade's functionality in real martial use, instead of relying upon some magical or fantasy properties, then I can't help you. This is a horrendous design, doomed to utter and complete failure as a weapon.

Meh, I don't see what the problem is. It's just a very, very big sword, so it's used like a sword, except bigger. There are crazier weapons out there.

The Buster is partly inspired by the Zanbatō, the fabled "horse-chopping sword" that turns up in some Asian legends-- but was only actually made as an oversized temple offering you weren't even supposed to lift.

Oh God, that Wiki article. I can't even begin to explain what's wrong with it. Please don't link it again.

Look, as far as I know, "zanbatou" in the sense of "huge sword" was only actually mentioned in one single source, and that's Rurouni Kenshin. And don't get me wrong, Rurouni Kenshin is one of my favourite manga of all time. I've read the whole thing like three times. But the fact is, Nobuhiro Watsuki made up a lot of BS when it comes to weapons and martial arts history. It's about as reliable as... well, as you would expect from a comic book featuring a two-stories tall giant and a guy riding around in a fully functioning clockwork robot suit in 19th century Japan.

(For goodness sake, "rurouni" isn't even a real word. Watsuki admited he made it up because it sounded good. This is a man who takes liberties with his own language.)

As far as I can tell, "zanbatou" appears to be a direct translation of the Chinese zhanmadao, and if so the Japanese equivalent weapon would be a nagamaki. There is no actual standardized term for "absurdly huge fantasy sword," and whoever wrote that article has my undying scorn for trying to pass a manga reference off as some sort of established fact. Most of the examples cited are just... well, absurdly huge fantasy swords. Not everything has to be neatly categorized, you know.

The fact is: Any Japanese sword with a blade longer than three shaku (ca 105 cm) was simply an odachi, a "great sword", pretty much across the board. Any blade shorter than three shaku but longer than two was a daito, which is to say a regular katana or tachi. Any blade between one and two shaku was a koto, that is to say a wakizashi or kodachi. Any blade shorter than one shaku was a tanto. The Japanese are pretty anal about their sword definitions.

Now, it's true very long odachi were made to be temple offerings, but that had more to do with the fact that they were outlawed as actual weapons at the time. Since they weren't actually meant to be used and because forging very long swords was very difficult, these temple swords were often made oversized on purpose as a way for swordsmiths to show off their skills. Basically, they were publicity stunts. They really don't have anything to do with the oversized swords you see in anime, manga and video games.

A sword like Cloud's (and I've seen them drawn a lot bigger; see InuYasha or early Ruroni Kenshin) is just too heavy to be worth trying to swing, and making it a sword (as opposed to an oversized axe or hammer) also means the metal's likely to be too thin and shatter itself. So yes, a Buster Sword would be a heavily magic weapon, probably spelled to hold itself together

I don't know about that. Sure, the square-cube law is a thing and something like the buster sword would probably have some tricky mass distribution, but it's still a huge chunk of tempered steel. Unless you are cutting tanks and skyscrapers in half, you are not more likely to break it against anything than you are a regular sword. Probably less.

And if you are cutting tanks and skyscrapers in half, why would you ever single out that one aspect to be realistic about? It always amuses me how people will look at something absolutely absurd and then focus on relatively minor issues.

Case in point:

(or just given to someone with superhuman strength; a berserker would love anything that big that wouldn't break on him). Very clumsy, but just the thing to smash a dragon or a wave of knights. But it would still be pure ego not to make it in the form of a hammer, when it's so awkward it can't have the control you'd want a sword for.

Look, would these swords be impossible to swing around in real life? Sure. But that's the whole point. That if you give one to a guy like Cloud Strife - someone who can wield it as a regular sword - most ordinary people aren't going to be able to touch him. If he's not notably slower or clumsier than any other swordsman, but his sword is five feet long and packs a hundred pounds behind every swing, how would you even defend yourself against that? That's why you want one of these silly things in the first place.

(Also, why would a giant hammer be less awkward? It's exactly the same thing except dealing blunt damage rather than cutting. Seriously, man, what's your deal with hammers?)